Parking Contravention Enforecement Notice - I believe it's not enforceable?

[imoscarsmum]

I drive a company car and parked in an MFI car park in Warrington in August. I did see a sign stating it was for customer use only, which was fine as I had some business to attend to and then went into the store to look for furniture.

 

Today I received (via my employer) a Parking Contravention Enforecement Notice from Civil Enforcement Ltd, saying I had parked from 10:38 to 13:00 and must pay £150 within 28 days (£75 within 14 days), and the usual blurb.

They also say that they have photographic evidence and to obtain a copy I can pay them £10 please!

 

I have done some reading on this excellent site and believe I have a case against this because:

 

1. There is no sign in the carpark warning me of the penalty clause if I overstay the free time allowed (can't remember the details - will check at the weekend - but the notice does not tell me these either).

2. It's an unfair penalty for breach of contract

 

I do not dispute that I was there (cannot remember what time I arrived and left) but I do not wish to pay £10 to view photographs. How can they prove I was there for such a long time and how can I prove that I actually went into the store?

 

I have seen a couple of template letters here but would appreciate thoughts on whether it is worth paying the £10 and on what grounds I should dispute the charge.

[Sidewinder]

Top and bottom of it is that it is a private parking charge (not a fine) and relatively straightforward to defend. To successfully enforce the charge through a court they would need to prove that you had accepted the terms of a contract whereby you agreed to pay a certain amount of money if you breached the terms of the contract. Your argument is that no contract was formed as you did not see signs let alone agree the terms outlined on them.

 

The problem is that it is a company vehicle and the correspondence will go through the company. How prepared would they be to refuse payment, or tolerate your refusal to pay when they receive (and they will!) increasingly threatening letters from the parking company, then debt collectors, then solicitors?

 

Make no mistake that however valid your grounds for the ticket to be cancelled, the parking company will reject any appeal. They are running a (very lucrative) business and rely on people accepting the charge in order to make money and will most certainly argue that the signs are adequate and that they will pursue legal action to recover their dues. If you were to hold out and refuse to pay on the grounds that no contract exists, then it is extremely unlikely that they would ever sue you to force payment, but they WILL use some pretty harsh threats to try to make you back down.

 

Will your company accept this, as they will have to demand that the matter is taken up with the driver (and they don't legally have to name that person), and field unpleasant letters when they don't appear to be getting anywhere?

 

Search the forums for Civil Enforcement and you will see what others have done to deal with parking charges, and read the sticky on the front page about Private Parking Companies.

[Steve__M]

By the sounds of it, the thing you have to watch out for is to stop your employer being misled into paying the charge and then passing the charge to you.

 

Can't you get your employer to write to them stating that "Our drivers are not authorised to enter into such contracts on our behalf, therefore you should contact the driver to obtain payment. Unfortunately for data protection reasons we cannot provide you with the driver details".

 

Make it clear to your employer the information you've read on this site about private parking companies, (as opposed to local authority), and insist that you company does not divulge your personal details to a third party.

 

No I wouldn't pay the tenner or contact them unless they contacted me directly.

[Sidewinder]

1. There is no sign in the carpark warning me of the penalty clause if I overstay the free time allowed (can't remember the details - will check at the weekend - but the notice does not tell me these either).

2. It's an unfair penalty for breach of contract.

 

Just re-reading that you couldn't of course argue the charge on both points if you opted to try the standard appeal approach. Either there was no sign, OR there was a sign, but the level of charge is an unfair term in the contract.

 

Your entire argument is that no contract existed as there was no signage not that you agreed to a contract but disagree with the unfair term (if that makes sense )